By End 2016, Over 43% of World's Skyscrapers Are In China

[TaiShang]

Yep I also felt dizzy when I look out the window from my office! Anyway that's business life, when we get rich, let's run away from forest of concrete-steel-glass and go for traditional architecture like this:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-tradition-looking-homes.447875/#post-8658617

Photos: Feel like an emperor in these traditional Chinese homes
Unique Taohuayuan, Suzhou, China – Traditional style houses are becoming increasingly popular among China's urban elite who want to set themselves apart from more middle class real estate consumers.

I think the central idea is sustainable development. Efficient housing_office growth in metropolitan areas adds to overall sustainability.

Dizziness is a biological condition. One would feel dizzy at the top of a mountain in the wilderness. Concentrated housing , in fact, ensures that we would have large spaces untouched by human activities and reserved for leisure or agriculture.

Besides a formidable skyline of steel and glass adds to national image.

 

[Khanate]

Yep I also felt dizzy when I look out the window from my office! Anyway that's business life, when we get rich, let's run away from forest of concrete-steel-glass and go for traditional architecture like this:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-...-tradition-looking-homes.447875/#post-8658617

Photos: Feel like an emperor in these traditional Chinese homes
Unique Taohuayuan, Suzhou, China – Traditional style houses are becoming increasingly popular among China's urban elite who want to set themselves apart from more middle class real estate consumers.

This looks absolutely amazing.

I'll never understand the craze over skyscrapers. Living in a "building" doesn't improve the inhabitants overall quality of life. In fact, it has an adverse effect. I like the The Interlace project in Singapore which incorporates more green and open spaces while focusing on the social aspects of housing. Its a design that seeks harmony with nature instead of creating cages that house people as if they are chickens.

I think the central idea is sustainable development. Efficient housing_office growth in metropolitan areas adds to overall sustainability.

Besides a formidable skyline of steel and glass adds to national image.

I guess that's part of the problem when city planners focus on skyline more than social wellness.

 

[Mista]

This looks absolutely amazing.

I'll never understand the craze over skyscrapers. Living in a "building" doesn't improve the inhabitants overall quality of life. In fact, it has an adverse effect. I like the The Interlace project in Singapore which incorporates more green and open spaces while focusing on the social aspects of housing. Its a design that seeks harmony with nature instead of creating cages that house people as if they are chickens.




I guess that's part of the problem when city planners focus on skyline more than social wellness.

I agree with you. Skyscrapers shouldn't just only be a place for people to live in. Endless of such skyscrapers across the landscape like Hong Kong can be monotonous and depressing.

Here are some other examples from Singapore which focus on nature, shared open spaces and the social aspects of housing. They are public housing.

SkyVille@Dawson:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/29/asia/singapore-public-housing/

SkyTerrace@Dawson:

 

[Shotgunner51]

I like the The Interlace project in Singapore which incorporates more green and open spaces while focusing on the social aspects of housing.

That building is awesome! Great sharing, thanks!

I'll never understand the craze over skyscrapers.

IMO it's one result of urban expansion. As cities expand, they may do it in 2D or 3D. In the latter case buildings naturally become taller, and taller, becoming skyscrapers, especially in high-density districts.

My suggestion on urban planning will be like: construct a web of urban rail transport and lay the city on top of it, plan high-density districts within 1~2 km radius from stations for commercial/residential, and keep the rest of the city low-density for public/leisure/residential/industrial or just leave it natural.

 

[AndrewJin]

That building is awesome! Great sharing, thanks!

IMO it's one result of urban expansion. As cities expand, they may do it in 2D or 3D. In the latter case buildings naturally become taller, and taller, becoming skyscrapers, especially in high-density districts.

My suggestion on urban planning will be like: construct a web of urban rail transport and lay the city on top of it, plan high-density districts within 1~2 km radius from stations for commercial/residential, and keep the rest of the city low-density for public/leisure/residential/industrial or just leave it natural.

 

[SorryNotSorry]

Good for China!

 

[Mista]

That building is awesome! Great sharing, thanks!

IMO it's one result of urban expansion. As cities expand, they may do it in 2D or 3D. In the latter case buildings naturally become taller, and taller, becoming skyscrapers, especially in high-density districts.

My suggestion on urban planning will be like: construct a web of urban rail transport and lay the city on top of it, plan high-density districts within 1~2 km radius from stations for commercial/residential, and keep the rest of the city low-density for public/leisure/residential/industrial or just leave it natural.

I recently watched a documentary about Singapore's urban planning. Apparently the authorities are planning to '3-dimensionalize' urban planning. So maybe instead of designating this area solely for residential, you designate this 'volume' for residential and the 'volume' above it for commercial or garden or whatever. Basically mixed-used building on a larger scale.

It makes urban living much more integrated and vibrant instead of the monotonous residential towers we see today. Some even suggest to connect the buildings with sky bridges or sky gardens to reduce the psychological restrictions humans feel when traveling. Humans after all is an animal that move horizontally and there is an innate desire to roam around freely. You don't feel 'trapped' in a single building.

All these are still concepts though.

 

[shadows888]

I recently watched a documentary about Singapore's urban planning. Apparently the authorities are planning to '3-dimensionalize' urban planning. So maybe instead of designating this area solely for residential, you designate this 'volume' for residential and the 'volume' above it for commercial or garden or whatever. Basically mixed-used building on a larger scale.

It makes urban living much more integrated and vibrant instead of the monotonous residential towers we see today. Some even suggest to connect the buildings with sky bridges or sky gardens to reduce the psychological restrictions humans feel when traveling. Humans after all is an animal that move horizontally and there is an innate desire to roam around freely. You don't feel 'trapped' in a single building.

All these are still concepts though.

Singapore need to make the best use of her land space which are at an extreme premium. other countries have more flexibility (hello endless suburbs).

 

[Shotgunner51]

'3-dimensionalize' urban planning

connect the buildings with sky bridges or sky gardens to reduce the psychological restrictions humans feel when traveling

Exactly, that's why I said skyscrapers is a result of 3D urban planning. Buildings not just go tall, but also go deep underground, at levels in between connectivity (pedestrian walks) is created for people to roam. Shanghai Lujiazhui and Xujiahui are some examples, skycrapers here are well connected at multiple levels both above ground and underground, people can meet plenty of business counterparts since businesses are highly aggregated here, use a huge variety of leisure during breaks, all within comfortable walking distance.

 

[Oldman1]

The West doesn't lack money, they lack political will. Their political culture favours individualism over collectivism. This hinders their infrastructural development because no development can satisfy everyone. Some prefer development, some prefer nature. Hence the term, NIMBY. Their minority have a disproportionate say in their policy. The easiest way for their politicians is to leave it as it is and not ruffle any feathers.

Moreover the West in general seems to hate urbanization and gentrification. The American poster above (@Hamartia Antidote ) is a typical example of it. Nothing wrong with it, just a difference in culture. Their tolerance for personal space is much lower than East Asians, and that's why they value privacy a lot. East Asians enjoy companionship and will get pitied by others if one is alone (as well as 凑热闹 in festivals), while Westerners value independence and personal space. Individualism vs collectivism, again.

In short, East Asians prefer dynamism while Westerners prefer tranquility. Their need for privacy resulted in a 'dislike' of urbanization. They prefer to have their own cars, parking lots, parks, swimming pools, playgrounds etc. This is only possible if you live in a very low density area such as rural area. East Asians on the other hand don't see any problem taking public transport or allowing their children to play in the same playground as other children; the sharing of common space. I guess social order and security plays a factor too.

However I find their way of living wasteful and an inefficient usage of resources. This is apparently more so in America than in Europe.

Well thats us, but don't be surprised that many others besides America wants that lifestyle where its less urban and more suburban if not rural to the point of being boring. If they want to work in the city or urban areas, thats the reason to have a car. Or take the train towards it.

 

[Khanate]

My suggestion on urban planning will be like: construct a web of urban rail transport and lay the city on top of it, plan high-density districts within 1~2 km radius from stations for commercial/residential, and keep the rest of the city low-density for public/leisure/residential/industrial or just leave it natural.

My OCD is so pleased with your approach to city planning.

Malaysia is experimenting with multi-layered cites.

Source: Forest City

 

[gambit]

Living in a "building" doesn't improve the inhabitants overall quality of life.

It does not. Granted, the 'quality of life' value is highly influenced by one's own perspective, but one's home is a place of refuge in many ways, least of all physical, the others are emotional and psychological.

Am not saying apartment living is negative in any way, whether that apartment is in a two-story complex or a high priced skyscraper where every resident have its private elevator. In my early adult life, I lived in apartments that were comfortable and I was happy.

That said, a standalone house is much better, especially for a family. A small yard for the young child and a little bit of a flower bed. Walk out of the front door and see different houses and their decor. A neighborhood with unique characters. The empty spaces between houses gives a real sense of privacy in a way that walls between apartments cannot. City parks cannot best the pleasure of strolling the streets of the neighborhood. An average house is better than a luxury apartment any day.

 

[Shotgunner51]

My OCD is so pleased with your approach to city planning.

Malaysia is experimenting with multi-layered cites.

Multi-layered cites, yes that's exactly the idea, and best with a lot of green added to it, excellent! Indeed these days if residential complexes are big enough then is very popular to be constructed in a way that separates vehicle traffic and pedestrian. Rail transport connectivity for people to commute on weekdays, and people drive on holidays or for other leisure activities.

P.S.: What's OCD?

 

[simple Brain]

A combination of high-rises and green or other types of natural landscape is ideal.


Chengdu, Sichuan Province, Southwest China
View attachment 370543 View attachment 370544

Liuzhou, Guangxi Autonomous Region, Southwest China
View attachment 370545 View attachment 370546

Xi'an, Shaanxi Province, Northwest China
View attachment 370547

Hefei, Anhui Province, Central China
View attachment 370548

God, that second Picture is unbelievably gorgeous!

 

[Mista]

It does not. Granted, the 'quality of life' value is highly influenced by one's own perspective, but one's home is a place of refuge in many ways, least of all physical, the others are emotional and psychological.

Am not saying apartment living is negative in any way, whether that apartment is in a two-story complex or a high priced skyscraper where every resident have its private elevator. In my early adult life, I lived in apartments that were comfortable and I was happy.

That said, a standalone house is much better, especially for a family. A small yard for the young child and a little bit of a flower bed. Walk out of the front door and see different houses and their decor. A neighborhood with unique characters. The empty spaces between houses gives a real sense of privacy in a way that walls between apartments cannot. City parks cannot best the pleasure of strolling the streets of the neighborhood. An average house is better than a luxury apartment any day.

I have to disagree with you here. You are only looking at the advantage of standalone houses and yet omitting the advantages of high-rises.

Inside the property, of course a standalone house is better. Bigger space, more privacy. But the desirability and hence pricing of a property doesn't only depend on that. It also depends on what is outside the property; eg: location. The advantage of high-density living is that everything is convenient. Schools, malls, food, jobs, transport, healthcare etc can be minutes of walk away and therefore a much more vibrant neighborhood.

The reasons you gave are very subjective. It can differ greatly between individuals as well as cities. What is real sense of privacy? How much do you need it in exchange of the opportunity costs associated with it? Do other people think like you that strolling in city parks is not as enjoyable as strolling in the neighborhood? Or is it actually just in your city that you find city parks inferior? If an average house is better than a luxury apartment any day, why is there such a high market demand for luxury apartment (reflected by its prices)?

P.S.: What's OCD if I may ask?

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Basically a personality trait which is compulsive about everything to be neat, tidy and organized.